About your Search

20121202
20121210
STATION
FBC 40
CNBC 6
MSNBCW 5
CNNW 4
KGO (ABC) 2
KPIX (CBS) 2
WRC (NBC) 2
MSNBC 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 84
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 84 (some duplicates have been removed)
spending in order to reduce trillion dollar deficits and a national debt that is now mind-boggling league not -- monotonous. house minority leader disagrees vehemently with the speaker on how to reduce deficits and debt. today she offered a paradoxical statement on fiscal policy that would make both casey stiegel and yogi berra proud. the nation now just 24 days away from $600 billion of spending cuts and tax increases that will automatically kicked in. and pelosi has some wise words for washington. please listen terror. >> this is a moment of truth. the clock is ticking. christmas is coming. the goose is getting fat. in many homes across america it is very, very lean times. you cannot cut your way to deficit reduction. lou: that's right. pelosi says we cannot get our way to deficit reduction. listen to the top democrat in the house of representatives, the former speaker of the house unveiling -- on dealing with the fiscal crisis one more time. >> in many homes across america ad is a very, very lean time. you cannot cut your way to deficit reduction. lou: today said minority leader appear
to raise taxes right now. you don't get enough revenue to deal with the deficit and by the way, we got 2.7% economic growth, which people were jumping up clapping about the markets were, but that's still pretty lousy. >> all of that inventory build. >> that won't happen again u ben stein? >> one reason to raise taxes we have 1 trillion dollar eficit, but i agree with charlie, we've got to cut this noncess out how we need 50 billion of extra stimulus. look, we're running 3illion a day of deficit spending, we don't even know if deficit spending is stimulative. we don't have to prove that that's stimulative. we're running such a huge deficit. unless he's a poker player and this is a bid to throw us off pace, that's not a serious proposal. we're not dealing with this seriously at 1600 pennsylvania avenue and he owes the population a lot more than he's owing. >> neil: adam, i'm worried that they make a christmas treeut of this and throwing more and more ornamts because it's the next legislation that we're cobblingogether we might as well put some spending in there. in this case, a minimum of
not the federal government and make it a big and huge one and any lttle niche that you can knock down the deficit is good. >> okay, but john, what happens to the states. we are finding out that california is signing up for powerball because of the revenues that they get. ist bad for states. >> it is really bad for states. wayne has much chae of winning the lottery as geth through a comment without johnathon interrupting. >> zero. >> and the problem you have with this. this could be a billion dollar ck mots and huge and going to kill the state lottos and in the stouthern states. they were sold as a way of funding education . that didn't happen. they are dependent on the general fund. cash strapped states that depend on the lotto, you will cripple the funding for the states is it a bad idea. it robseter to pay paul. >> johnathon, you wouldn't be cutting wayne off. >> i am keeping quiet. wayne has to check his calculator. 580 million jackpot would pate zero.zero 3 percent of the national debt. we don't need a new plan to pay off the debt. we need aew philosophy and not exasbrate the debt. in a fully
million people and other deficits, close the huge deficits might not have a huge effect on the economy, however, if xes across the board and let's not forget the spending cuts that are ought maic in the defense industry, defense industry alone is looking at hundreds of thousands of job cuts next year with nos mandatory cuts go into effect. i'm not saying they are. so it's both cutting and taxing, we're too focus on the tax. bottom line, the government takes it out of the system cutting and raising taxes and the small or deficit. that means that people are going to be out of work, almost by definition in the short run. but in the long run it's a healthier economy that doesn't go down the path of greece. if the long run greece would have low unemployment, but they do not, but yes, we're going to go a percent, if it happens the worse case scenario, but in five years we won't be not able to borrow money. >> brenda: julian, you can go ahead and respond. >> first of l, the ernst & young study has been debunked over and ov. and number two, the bush tax cuts, if you let the bh tax cuts. the cr
us with the deficit of one. that is the deficit. sizable it is. this will be the president's fourth for which he is personally responsible, fourth deficit in excess of a trillion dollars. president obama wants to plug that trillion dollars hole by raising taxes on household incomes, as we all know that have incomes over $250,000. the top 2%. that would bring in $802 million, $82 billion. that'sbout 8% of that deficit. so does that suggt we have a tax problem or, perhaps, a spending problem? think about this taxpayers making more than $250,000 representing the top 2% paid more than 46% f all texas. that would seem like a pretty fair deal to most of us, but the president says it is not fair. we don't know what that number is. how much should it be? and contrary to what the president would have you believe as he campaigns untack sites all around the country and against the wealthy, he's doing a lot of that. the bush tax rates are not the root of our problems. in fact, individual tax payments rose, get this, $2,303,000,000,000 or 26%. over the past two ears. under those very low unshare
revenue to have meaningful deficit reduction. and unfortunately, the changes in the tax code, which the republicans say they want to turn to, will start increasing taxes and cutting tax deductions for the middle class americans. >> senator, can i stop you on that point? i think that's significant. what you just said is what the president has said, is that we can't get enough revenue to solve the problem unless the rates go up. but wait a minute. last summer, in july of 2011, this is what he said about how to get to $1.2 trillion in revenue. listen. >> what we said was, give us $1.2 trillion in additional revenues. which could be accomplished without hiking taxes -- tax rates, but could simply be accomplished by eliminating loopholes, eliminating some deductions, and engaging in a tax reform process that could have lowered rates generally, while broadening the base. >> so if that was true then, senator, why can't he just do tax deductions? republicans say they would agree to that, and not focus so much on raising the top rates? >> david, we have set a target of cutting $4 trillion ou
and deficit levels that the country is facing . someone on the democratici side saying keep them and extend . republicans saying we have to cut somewhere. that's a real discussion. >> if i tld youhere was a program that cost you 30 billion and returned 18 billion to the economy and so had a net cost of 12 billion and supported 400,000 jobbings, you would say that is a good idea it is it not a matterf reducing the deficit because in congress we have people extending tax cuts that further blow a hole in the debt ceiling. >> i don't wt to be cruel, christian. i don't want to be curt. everydollar comes back a a $1.90 a. forget about the stock market and investing and put our money in unemployment benefits. its it resting on a complete fallacy of economics that conequals wealth. it is the same that pelosi and you. cash for clunkers and house stimulus . shov ready stimulus jobbings. >> johthon why don't you listeto mark sand zandy of moody who advised john mccain's presidential anything. it is nhing to do with a progressive position it is facts and common sense. >> that'slet numbers there. john l
, for which we're responsible. there is a $1 trillion -- $1.04 trillion deficit this year, fifth year in a row we have this kind of number. we're going to, as folks used to say when i was a young fellow, this country's going to hell in a hand basket if we don't get our act together. >> and right now, we still have time. dollar's not falling. we don't have treasury bond yields soaring through the roof lou: the euro is rising against the dollar. isn't that embarrassing? >> that's not a concern to the administration or congress. lou: we should say to hell with the sound dollar. let's em brails strong competitiveness. last i looked at the trade deficit, we were, again, lagging and uke sucking popped water. there's a rising deficit stripping our gdp. >> and right now europe is in a relatively deep recession. we're still above water. lou: you jumped all over the punch line because you talk about things not making sense. folks, this is not making sense. i'm delighted because people have wealth left in the equities market, the bond market. how long will that be the case if we go over the cliff? >> won
but used that money for deficit reduction because he believed that would control the economy. president clinton did listen to him. and i'll tell you, i talked to bob rubin about that anecdote where clinton says you tell me a bunch of bond traders control the economy -- i'm paraphrasing -- and rubin said, yes, i am. i asked him about that once a couple years ago, and he said it was true. it wasn't as dramatic woodward made it out to be, but it did has happen. but you didn't get that out of geithner. you kind of don't think you'll get that out of lew. he's very much aligned intellectually with president obama particularly on the notion of fairnesses. you know, you talk to economistses. should we really be raising taxes now? no. hour hour tax increases, we're going to lose the deductions -- >> probably shouldn't be cutting that much. the economy is like in a very weird state right now, kind of like i think the notion is to grow it now, you know? and, you know, this guy doesn't see that. he sees raising taxes not as an economic efficiency so to speak, but as you know, you don't get a lot of
't raise enough taxes to completely deal with the deficit. and you do have to do reforms. you need to reform the tax system. you certainly need to make additional cuts. i do want to remind you though, that we have already voted on one trillion dollars of cuts, cuts that would cause great pain. i agree what you 100%. it can not be done. melissa: spending cutting numbers are even smaller than the tax numbers. they don't get us there either. i'm worried about stalling the economy. in the meantime when we talk about raising taxes and what it would do to small business. democrats like to point out we would only raise taxes on 3% of small business owners. >> right. melissa: but that 3% generates 50% of the income from small business. so they're hiring the majority of people. to me that is going to cost us jobs. >> well, you know what? i think that what will cost us jobs for sure is if we go off thissfiscal cliff, because it is not just about raising tacks. it is also about the debt ceiling. it is about unemployment insurance. we have number of key issues that absolutely have to be resolv
accomplish something. if you go back to before bush tax cuts, three quarters of the deficit is gone. it was supposed to sunset two years ago. when is a good time to let those things sunset? >> you're right, there's never a good time. >> maybe do something with the sequester, but let the tax cuts expire. >> although i have to say at this time it's too much i think in terms of the tax increase. >> we never want any pain. >> you're right. and we do need to get our fiscal house in order. but again, this is why the idea would be to come up with a longer term plan where you could scale some of these things in and you have to come up with a plan that you'll stick to, otherwise you get into this where -- >> we never stick to anything. if we get another deal that is toothless and -- >> the markets will become even more skeptical because we've seen this before. but i have to say two things. i don't necessarily buy into the deal that there's a fiscal slope. i have to say on the tax side, one of the things we keep talking about is the amt. boy, that's something that will -- >> howard goes on an
the deficit in the medium to long-term so as to avoid an immediate and dramatic cut in the short-term. yes, that's right. now, this may well present a problem for john boehner's caucus, because john boehner sent a letter to the president this week with his own plan, which advocates what just might be the least popular policy in american politics. okay, maybe that's hyperbole. but just be a tiny bit, i mean, mandatory gay marriage, in which every single married straight person had to immediately divorce their spouse, and accept a state-assigned same-gender spouse to replace them would probably be more popular than what john boehner proposed this week. what john boehner is advocating is making medicare available to fewer americans. as it happens, there is brand-new polling out today on how americans feel about the idea of congress using these deficit negotiations to make cuts to medicare. 79% of americans say they do not want congress to touch medicare in these deficit negotiations. 79%. if you want to get specific about john boehner's proposal, what he wants to do to medicare is to raise th
split right down the metal on the political ppll on how they want obama to cut the deficit. 41 percent responded in favor of spending cuts. 41 percent of respondents saying they favor tax increases. the white house says it will offer a counterproposal to house speaker proposal. saying that unless he accepts tax increases on the rich the president is willing to go over the cliff. let's get straight to the politics of these developments and the rhetoric and possible economic impact of failure to resolve the issues. joining as, former special assistant to president george w. bush, a veteran political consultants and republican pollster. let's start, if i may, with you. do you think both sides right now are seriously ready to go over the cliff? >> i think the president is very ready because they are reading into this election last month a mandate that i simply don't see. the president got 15 million americans to vote against him which fail to produce any type of meaningful budget in his democratic controlled senate. we are at the disco club because of the president's inability to ever a si
more deficit reduction if we do the fiscal cliff. i think the markets will reward the fiscal cliff over a period. there will be some panic and moaning and groaning, but first of all, the fiscal cliff is not a real cliff. it's a slope. and you're going to get the biggest bank for the buck in terms of deficit reduction. i think the economy can stand it. yes, we will go into two quarters of recession the cbo says, and i believe that. we're in deep trouble here. somebody's going to have to pay the bill. it's going to have to be all of us. >> joining me with more on all of this, patrick j. buick as well as former clinton special counsel davis. the president campaigns on $800 billion in new taxes. he now wants 1.6 trillion. he wants twice the amount, lanny. he wants a blank check and congress to give up its authority as it relates to money and say no, no, let me raise the debt ceiling any time i want. he wants 150 billion in new stimulus but no entitlement cuts at all, no spending cuts at all. now that sounds to me like somebody that's not serious. >> i don't know where to begin to correct so
. government budgets that are in deficit at every level. there is no other backstop other than the organizations like us and others who are serving thess communities, and that it is important to understand that we have to take a fair and balanced approach. when announcing we all money to contribute to getting our fiscal house in order. we absolutely do, but we have to do it on the spending side and we have to like all the sources of revenue, all the source of revenue, not just a charitable deductions to figure out how to get our fiscal house in order. gerri: i don't know if it will happen by the end of the month. we have a long way to go. everyone seems to be talking pass themselves. thank you for coming on. appreciate your time. great information. >> thank you. gerri: likely be hurt the most of the deductions goal weight make up tonight's top five. food for the poor. based in florida using 97% of its billion dollars in revenue for its charitable commitments. for more information visit food for the poor. the american red cross which we have heard a lot about recently in the wak
it runs up the debt and deficit. >> the best thing for my children's future. i have two boys. one 10 years and one ten months and i'm worried about climate change and their future. we need to stop encouraging the industries that are causing this problem. the oil industry, gas and coal industries. and we need to start encouraging clean energy if we will solve it. the very first place to start is to stop giving these subsidies. it is a no-brainer. the vast majority of americans of all parties actually support this perspective. melissa: without affordable energy we have no economy and that is for sure bad for my children. we have no jobs. we have no industry. >> why is the fastest growing new source of energy in this country wind energy or distributed solar. melissa: because it is completely supported by the government and by my tax dollars. >> not even close to as much as --. melissa: absolutely no money to spend on these things you know what -- >> actually big oil, gas and coal are actually much more heavily subsidized. melissa: you and disagree what is subsidy is. that is fine for debate f
overwhelming the deficit story was at that point. you know, you look at that administration. the coming in, just no one thought they could do anything. it's not unlike the conversations we're having now. and they went in, they did the deal, president bush had to shift from read my lips to as only he could put it, read my hips. and it was good for the country, it created a political dynamic that cost president bush the election in 1992, and which we're still living, because that gave us grover norquist, et cetera. >> let's get to grover norquist in a minute, but i do have a question. the gop plan consists of $2.2 trillion in savings over a decade. that includes raging the eligibility age for medicare from 65 to 67. and lowering cost of living increases for social security benefits. they also propose overhauling the tax code to generate $800 billion in new revenue. but without raising taxes on the wealthy. in a letter to the president, leading republicans compared their plan to one erskine bowles drew up last year. >> not even close. >> he rejected that connection and the white house, of cou
that calls for $2.2 trillion in deficit savings. it includes $800 billion in tax reforms, 600 billion in medicare reforms and 600 billion in spending cuts. because it doesn't contain tax hikes for the wealthiest americans or specifics about which loopholes will be eliminated, the president immediately rejected the republican proposal. want to know how far apart democrats and republicans are? listen to this. >> i think we're going over the cliff. >> it's unfortunate the white house has spent three weeks doing basically nothing. >> what we can't do is sit here trying to figure out what works for them. >> the president's idea of negotiation is roll over and do what i ask. >> it's clear to me they made a political calculation. if their ideas are different from ours, we can't guess what they are. >> they need to be more specific. >> some specificity from them. >> he can't be serious. >> haven't even begun to be serious. >> we need to get serious. >> i don't think they're serious. >> i would say we're nowhere. period. we're nowhere. >> hard to disagree with that. we're nowhere. period. >> t
was pleased to receive her endorsement. >> greta: when you became governor, you inherented a in--d a deficit. do you remember what it was? >> yes. the day before the election, the general election, it was $250 million. >> greta: million? >> uh-huh. keep in mind, the state budget is only 5.6 billion, so the day before the general election we were having it reported as $250 million. the day after the election it came $450 million. >> greta: what happened in those 24 or 48 hours? >> certainly the administration that was in place was not being truthful with the public, and so the day after i certainly was informed that the deficit was much bigger. >> greta: how does that happen? weren't the figures public? i mean, i assume that people were following and reporting on governor richardson as a steward of the economy here. >> no. that was not what was happening. when was coming out -- what was coming out of the governor's office were figures that were not being honest with the people. >> greta: you must have just about fallen over when you saw the number jump in a period of 24 or 48 hours. >> absolu
in the yearly deficit and not even a chip of a cent off the debt. he said he would rather go over the fiscal cliff than not to raise tax rates. so obama pushing higher taxes on the top 2%, not for economic reasons but for i'd logical reasons but there is also this obvious fact. obama wants to raise the top rates for political reasons. now that is he wants to force republicans to raise tacks in order to trigger a civil war within the gop and the conservative movement, and in that respect sadly obama is having some success. now so long as this debate is focused not on cutting spending but on raising daxs and revenues with the only question being which taxes, how much revenue, then obama wins. now if obama succeeds in making the argument not about his spending, but about grover norquist, he wins there, too. for republicans, on the other hand, if they can figure out a way to refocus the debate on spending, they win and the country wins. we can't kid ourselves that's correct is not easy to do. obama has the biggest microphone in the land and he also has the media in his hip pocket. all the gop ha
on whose estimates you look at we'll have a deficit 1.1, 1.2 or $1.4 trillion a year. >> yes. melissa: none of those things curb the spending we're doing. >> no, right. melissa: that is what i thought was shocking and distressing about crunching these numbers. >> you're absolutely right. the most important way to look at iscal cliff debate, the math is fine to go through it but the most important question in my mind will there be serious structural entitlement reforms. melissa: right. >> the kinds of reforms that will yield savings well down the road, even beyond, 10, 15, 40 year windows we're talking about. what are the structural reforms that would produce those kinds of results. those are only things we should be clear. the only things that would actually make a difference. the kinds of spending you're seeing to a great extent on the fiscal cliff and president's plan and lesser extent to the republican plan, largely discretionary spending cuts. a lot coming out of defense. these are not long-term structural changes that will put us on a path to a balanced budget. that will not happen. m
, in the end, the taxes are going up. we still have a trillion dollar deficit. this does not solve anything. at best, even if they raise the money they think they will, and i don't think they will raise any money, they are still left with a trillion dollar deficit. how are you going to bring down a trillion dollar deficit? i think the democrats are on -- i had to get that off my chest. stuart: gm car and truck sales are up 3%. the stock, dead flat. sales up 3%. that is the car sales numbers coming in today. steve, i want to get back to you here. the democrats say, wait a second, wait a second, you raise taxes on the rich just like the clinton did back in 1992 and you end up with a bill. you have a solid expansion. what do you make up with that argument? >> i hope they do not believe that argument. look, maybe barack obama is right. maybe if you raise these taxes, it will not hurt the economy. [talking over each other] stuart: bill clinton raised taxes and the economy took off. >> there are a lot of things that influence the economy. not just taxes. there are other things. there is no moneta
on military spending. >> absolutely. >> and that is increasing and guess what, that adds up to the deficit, right? >> david, the problem is deeper than wh you are describing. this goes back decades. when you look at entitlement spending over the last half century, it has steadily crept up four percent every year and that includes adjustments for pulation growth. so what then? you increase taxes four percent every year? that is absurd. at some point we need both parts to come together and tax this entlement creep. we mention obama ape lot. he hasn't helped the numbers. but when you look at enment spending it goes up under a republican president. he can go in this and blame the republicans. >> i didn't know there was a entitlement creep. maybe i got you wrong. >> it is it an itch. >> and john, what abouthis. we have a budget if you can call it a budget that includes tax increases and no cuts at all from our treasury security. >> the tax increase aspect is ridickulous. we have a spending problem . you look at entitlements. i think it is i i don't they should exist. we did make promises and so
, the growing deficit on the path to greece, the goalets worse once we kick the can away. that will be the overriding probleming not the slowing economy not people spending money, but sure, that might not happen in the first two months, but it will eventually happen if we keep kicking down the can. we want to prove to the world that we have a solution and if it takes a few months to get there and higher taxes for a while, big deal, we will get there. that's got to be the plan not just the same nonsense. >> yeah, but larry, that's part of your point, but jonas says we're not in a bad recession, we're certainly not in a good recovery. and if we just keep falling little bit by little bit, maybe as much as jump off the cliff, but it's certainly a slippery slope. >> brenda, the damage is already being done. we saw it in november retail sales and companies delaying activity already and we know the ratings agencies are minutes away, we're right to fix the problem in the long run than making a bandaid short-term deal. it doesn't get recovery. >> we're going to g a bandaid deal an
rid of the debt and deficit. >> we've dug ourselves into a deep hole. when i came to washington we talked about the budget, deficit in the billions, now in the trillions of dollars. part of the problem is the numbers are large but it's a million, million dollars. the debt is $6 trillion and we're borrowing $1.1 trillion a year. the problem the president faces, even if he gets his tax increase on the rich in negotiations, and he may very well. that leaves him with a trillion dollars budget deficit. so even if we do the tax increases, mr. president, what comes next? that's where we have to start addressing the spending side. >> the conversation a lot of folks don't want to have. republicans and democrats. >> republicans don't want to cut the military, the democrats don't want to cut entitlements and there's gridlock. but we have to get serious about this. if you look at businesses, the last four or five years and households, in recession they sucked in their stomach and got rid of extraneous spending. federal spending has gone up 30 or 40% as the private sector got efficient. i belie
trillion dollar deficits for as far as the eye can see. washington has a spending3 problem, not a revenue problem. if the president does not agree with our proposal, i believe he has an obligation to families and small businesses to offer a plan of his own. we are ready and eager to talk to the president about such plan. >> you did speak with the president earlier this week, can you characterize that call. also, it has to be increases in rates for the wealthy or no deal. >> the phone call was pleasant, but more of the same. it is time for the president to be serious and come back with a counter offer. [inaudible question] >> the risk the president wants us to take, increasing tax rates will hit many small businesses that produce 60-70% of the new jobs in our country. that is the whole issue. [inaudible question] >> i think that is reckless talk. [inaudible question] >> listen, raising taxes on small businesses will not help our economy and will not help those seeking work. i came out the day after the election to put revenues on the table. to take a step towards the president to try to re
's debt ceiling is clear. >> this is not about getting a handle on deficits or debt for him. it's about spending even more than he has. >> white house aids reject the republican claims that holding the debt limit over the president's head is the only mechanism to get him to trim spending. >> you're just going to keep at the debt limit goes higher, you spend more money. you and congress, both. >> that's false. president signed into law a trillion dollars in discretionary cuts. the president has a specific proposal to achieve $600 billion in savings from entitlement programs like health care entitlement programs. >> jay compared republican pressure on the debt ceiling to a hostage taking. >> a profoundly bad idea that i think could not be more frightening for american businesses, and american workers. >> treasury secretary tim geithner may have frightened people yesterday saying the white house is prepared to go off the fiscal cliff unless republicans bend on taxes. a comment by former democratic potential candidate howard deen frightened republicans that the debate is not just about rais
is preposterous when you're running trillion dollar deficit. and just to add insult, and here's the insult, he demands congress give up the power to control the deficit. that's obviously meanlt to humiliate the republicans. it's a non-starter. it's not acceptable. it's a way of saying to boehner you want to hand me your sword, you want to hand me your shirt? i want your trousers as well. the white house is not budging, and everybody's waiting, meaning the media, the administration are waiting for republicans to cave. >> look. i agree totally with you and their posture, their public posture appears that they're going that way. i'll give you a quick example. when john boehner started to answer the other day and he said well, our plan is to raise revenues on the rich, he was co opting barack obama's language and we read this week about the purging and the removal of conservatives and tea party members from their committee assignments because they didn't vote the way speaker boehner wants. that seems to me to be evidence that a surrender is coming. >> well, i'm not sure it's the appointments so mu
at that. >> republicans frequently argue it is critical to get a handle on the nation's deficits before the u.s. becomes like greece. there a terrible economy with 26% unemployment, the highest in europe, and almost no job opportunities for young people frequently lead to riots in the streets. now here a leading democrat is suggesting cutting spending too quick -- too quickly is the real problem. >> the community is concerned about all of their as you teary too. there are many things you can do to reduce debt, but still have a a -- an aspect of the economy. >> some say europe's austerity is a drag on economic growth because it relies on taxation while failing to rein in the expansion of government. and that would seem to back up a republican theme in this fiscal cliff argument. >> if we raise taxes on the top two rates which is about a million small businesses who employ 25% of the workforce, it will cost us over 700,000 jobs and reduce economic growth and lower take home pay. that's a bad scenario. >> the lead negotiator on the republican side of the table facing mr. obama says raising
leaders. governors are concerned about the impact of deficit reduction measures on their state budgebu. the latest gop offer would overhaul the tax code, raise $800 billion in new revenue but seek $600 billion in health savings, net savings add up to about $2.2 trillion over ten years. boehner called the white house's original offer la la land and it does appear that even though at one point bowles endorsed a blueprint like this, he's trying to distance himself from it right now. >> the president got re-elected. he's claiming he got re-elected in part because he wants to tax that 2%. he cannot go back on that. in the meantime, congress most of the republicans signed the grover norquist pledge which says you cannot tax that 2% more than anybody else. you can't increase the taxes. so we're at a stalemate and someone has to give and i don't see anyone giving right now. >> bank of america today commented on the let's jump crowd. the bungee jump crowd for which they think is a scenario. >> you wonder how much of that is in negotiating position. embraced early on by senator schumer, new york
. >> do you briyou believe if you rote deficit -- two different ways. you either keep the government that you have and pay for it by raising taxes, or you kind of leave taxes where they are and you shrink government down to where it pays for it. does it matter for the future and for growth which way you do it in your view? >> it does. if you put it all into like a tightening, so how much tightening occurs in the economy that would slow the economy, it's far better to actually reduce government spending than it is to actually raise taxes. >> although that hurts the economy, too. >> everything hurts the economy. so it's a question of which is most -- or least harmful and that tends to be cutting government spending. >> but i do think it's -- >> although tim geithner would disagree with me. >> one side wants to keep the government and entitlements like we have it. and the other side wants to take away all the excess government -- >> i think both sides agree that you need to do both. just a question of how much. >> we need to do both to do a deal. i don't think both sides dwre that it's
's savings. >> with a trillion dollar deficit right now. so if you cut 94 billion and nothing else changes you barely dented the deficit. the other programs are growing. we'll not see spending decline. in fact we'll likely have a emergency spending bill for sandy that is 60 billion. 94 is gone right there. >> even with a trillion dollars in cuts federal spending is on the way up every year starting with 3.5 trillion this fiscal year. nearly 3.6 trillion in 2014. 4 trillion by 2016 and 5 trillion by 2021. the cbo says even allowing 5 trillion in tax increases to hit the economy the next decade the federal government still spends $2.3 trillion more than it takes in. back to you. melissa: oh, rich edson thanks so much. adam: you think with the physical problems the country faces zooming at us like a 1959 he had sell going at us on a one way treat there would be sense of urgency. president obama has no meetings, no public appearances on the issue planned at least so far today. brad blakeman is not surprised. he says it is a clear sign we're going to go straight over the fiscal cliff. blakeman
of time. we were very concerned because we thought the budget was going to be -- the deficit was going to be about $150 billion. that shocked everyone into action. then, unlike now, there remains some degree of bipartisanship. there was comity, there was discussion, even as we battled over the budget, we worked together in a bipartisan way on many other issues. you didn't have the total polarization that you have today. >> i mean, when you were elected senate majority leader, i understand one of the first people that you called was the minority leader, senator dole. >> that's right. i called him right away, i went to see him almost immediately, and i said to him look, you've been here a long time, i'm relatively new, these are very tough jobs in the best of circumstances, and if we don't have some degree of trust between us, they will be impossible jobs. so i said to him i want to tell you how i intend to behave toward you and to ask that you behave towards me in the same way. and we agreed on the most basic of things. i told him i would not surprise him, that's important in the senate
the campaign, which is a balanced, responsible approach to deficit reduction that can help give businesses certainty and make sure that the country grows. and unfortunately, the speaker's proposal right now is still out of balance. >> sometimes you hear a sound byte and it sounds like the normal talking points of the campaign that you always here, you're always hearing politicians saying the same thing. but listen again to that last thing that the president said there. >> unfortunately the speaker's proposal right now is still out of balance. >> speaker's proposal is out of balance. empirical statement, sort of. there's a way to judge whether or not that statement is true. what's happening in washington is both sides, republicans and democrats, are making offers and counteroffers about how to deal with the fiscal mess that they created. this artificial debt line that washington created. the white house made its offer to republicans last week. they sent timothy geithner up to capitol hill to unveil the administration's offer to congressional republicans. the offer was essentially a mix of t
and then on everybody else. not so he can lower the debt or the deficit but so he can spend to his heart's content. as a result some democrats have pushed the president to just raise the nation's debt ceiling on his own. they believe he has that executive power by invoking the 14th amendment of the constitution. but jay jay cancer carney the white house spokesman has studied that. they do not believe the president has that executive power. what that means they have got to go to congress to get the debt ceiling lifted the next couple of mons. that means the showdown is coming, shep. >> shepard: ed henry at the white house lawn. one critical republic who criticized house speaker john boehner over own party fiscal cliff honor says is he resigning. an important man, too. south carolina senator jim demint a key force behind the tea party movement. the founder of the tea party caucus in the senate and who predicted that the healthcare debate would be president obama's water loo. remember that? earlier this week he argued that speaker boehner's proposal tax hikes would destroy jobs. but senator demind sa
the deficit and putts on a path to long-term stability. what i need, what the country needs what the business community needs in order to get to where we need to be is an acknowledgement that folks like me can afford to pay a little bit higher rate you if we combine that with a tax reform process and entitlement reform. then we can get a $4 trillion deficit reduction package. >> you can begin to see, if you take $400 billion in deductions, combine that with a partial increase in the top rate, remember, the president proposed to get about $1 trillion from raising the top rate to 396, you can see how some of the elements of a revenue package come together. one other note from that interview, tyler and sue, was that the president was asked will you bring a big business executive into your cabinet? he said i would love to. i'm in constant conversation. one of the challenges, though, is the confirmation process, which is difficult and forbidding for a lot of those business executives to go through. >>> it is, indeed, john. from what you heard from the president today, do you sense that they are in
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 84 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)